On Mar 2, 2011, at 3:19 AM, Michael Deutschmann wrote:
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011, MH Michael Hammer wrote:
The display name is problematic as Mr. Crocker has pointed out. One
solution to this which I have suggested in the past is to not display
the display name in the MUA if the email fails to authenticate.
That won't help.
I'm not sure who can say whether or not this will help until sufficient
usability testings has been done.
To fix this in the MUA, I'd have it strip the Full Name from *all*
messages, then re-insert the Full Name as listed in the user's address
book if there is any match against the real address.
That's another idea that could/should be tested.
The point being made on this thread is one I share, i.e. the MUA has a role to
play as an active client in email authentication scenarios. That's not yet a
consensus, but the concept is gaining momentum.
It comes down to usability testing, useful metrics, and peer-reviewed data
analysis. Then we should really know what we should be doing with the MUA, if
anything.
All that said, I don't believe MUA behavior is in scope for this IETF WG.
-- Brett
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html